Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

ashbury

Verified Member
  • Posts

    42,574
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    473

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by ashbury

  1. Now I'm almost sorry I asked. Uggggggly delivery. Did he receive any coaching at all in the GCL? CAN he be coached? Looks like a shoulder strain waiting to happen.
  2. Conversely, teams don't usually spend a roster spot on a 22 year old if they aren't pretty high on him. Super-high, I don't know.
  3. Because a question like this always brings out the nitpickers, I can't resist adding. In 1901, it was still the tail-end of an era where team nicknames weren't universally embraced. I note that this Cleveland team is listed by bb-ref.com as simply the Blues. Often the newspaper accounts would still refer to teams as the plural of the city name - e.g. the Clevelands might face the Washingtons for a game. Team nicknames were often assigned playfully by newspaper writers or others, and if a name found public acceptance it might last a few weeks or even become permanent (e.g. the Superbas became the Trolley Dodgers more or less this way). The Pirates' name was bestowed originally as a dig, for their having raided other professional teams too aggressively around 1890, and at some point the team adopted the name as a reverse badge of honor (or opprobrium). Cleveland in particular went through a succession of nicknames: Bluebirds/Blues, Bronchos, Naps (in honor of their star Napoleon Lajoie), before finally becoming the Indians, apocryphally in honor of Louis "Chief" Sockalexis who had played for an NL incarnation in that city late in the 19th century, but more likely because the team owner just liked the name. Baseball has amazing lineage and continuity, which is an important aspect of its charm. But, as with any major human enterprise, there are often interesting non-linear details beneath the surface.
  4. Or, he's only 22 years old and in the major leagues, and the Padres are utilizing him as a defense specialist and breaking him in slowly at bat.
  5. The issue as always is money. Relievers feel they get paid better (arbitration, which radiates to other non-FA contracts) when they rack up gaudy Save numbers. And players always are keeping an eye toward the next contract. Yes, even Saint Perk.
  6. Good phrasing but seemed like it needed an amplifier.
  7. I am very encouraged that he is not getting himself out on breaking pitches in the dirt like he was early this year. It kind of coincided with facing AA level pitching and above, and he didn't figure out the pitch recognition instantaneously. But (IMO), figure it out, he has. The power will come along later. (Just like we all said for Mauer... )
  8. When they signed Torii, I thought (and maybe posted) that they would get about the same production offensively and defensively if they would just promote Danny. While Torii didn't really exceed expectations on the field, I can still say I was wrong; Ortiz simply didn't step forward in 2015 the way he needed to, and treaded water instead.
  9. Almost all of whom were pretty desirable hitters. Jim Rice, Jackie Jensen, Miguel Tejada, Bobby Doerr, ...
  10. That is evident every time he runs the bases.
  11. We need Gary "Shef" Sheffield to come out of retirement just for this one play.
  12. Get some outs, boy-o.
  13. Maybe this is why Bostonians are all so bad at geometry. They think that this (holds thumb and finger 2 inches apart) is a foot.
  14. If Boston hadn't hogged all the snow last winter...
  15. Quick, who's got the anti-jinx mojo?
  16. Stay out of California, then. You'll be burned to a cinder.
  17. OK... Well.... Uh.... I saw you make a similar joke in another game thread a few months back. I think. / Don't believe I'm gonna make it to the end of this game. Still trying to get the knack of the eastern time zone. Getting the sleepies already...
  18. I once stood under a hoop for several minutes shooting a ball. Same result.
  19. As a moderator, I gotta pipe up to suggest going easy on rubbing people's noses in things, or gloating, or whatever way to describe looking up old quotes for purposes of vindication. Next time the team goes on a losing streak, guess who is going to feel empowered to return the sentiments in kind? And then on the next winning streak, the need to justify oneself is just that much greater. And so on, and so on. There is a long-running disagreement over whether the "negative nellies" or the "polyannas" hold too much sway here. The truth in my view is that it would be better to get over some of this stuff. We're all on the wrong side of the discussion every now and then. This is a game thread. Carry on. I just felt the need to harp a bit.
  20. Sorry, I changed my post because I found one I liked better for the purpose. But here's your Rubio shot again.
  21. Echoing the Tigers broadcasters, I'm afraid, but it wasn't even that good a bunt (much too hard) and he STILL beat it out. He may not be in the discussion for best player, yet, but will soon be in the discussion for most exciting.
  22. I don't know if "better" is the way I'd look at it, or simply "there's something intriguing the staff would like to explore." In the case of Condeelis I see 20 SO and 12 BB (uffda) in 15+ innings. He's listed as 6'5" 220 lb. I for one would pay $1 to watch an inning or three on one of the back fields in Ft Myers, just to see what we've got here.
  23. Guess I'm more of a republican (small r) than a democrat (small d) come to think of it. For local elections I'm fine with direct election of (say) council members or congressional delagates, but for example I prefer that the elected council choose who presides. For more important offices I am fine with there being a small buffer of some sort. For that matter, I'm not sure I understand the motivation to reduce the number in the house of representatives. If anything, the number should be massively higher, so that individual districts are more like the original intent of direct representation, than practically the size a state was 200 years ago. I realize there would be logistical issues (the Capitol building has no such room), and it would bother some people that the process was now more unruly, but it would be more democratic. US population in 1800 was 5.3 million and there were 106 Representatives, so each district was about 50K. If I'm doing the math right we need 6000 Representatives to keep the same spirit alive today. I think I'd like that - it would give Boehner some more to think about, if nothing else. The Senate should be small and deliberative, the House should reflect the momentary whim will of the people.
  24. Think Buxton might make a serviceable wide receiver? In a few years Sano might be our right tackle, but let's not think about that now.
×
×
  • Create New...